ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED. — Capital/Financing Update 2015

Mar 2, 2015

==> picture [183 x 63] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipseuranium.com.au Eclipse Metals Ltd is an Australian exploration company focused on exploring the Northern Territory and Queensland for multi commodity mineralisation. The company has an impressive portfolio of assets prospective for gold, manganese, iron ore, base metals and uranium mineralisation. The Company’s mission is to increase Shareholder wealth through capital growth and ultimately, dividends. Eclipse plans to achieve this goal by exploring for and developing viable mineral deposits to generate mining or joint venture income.

ASX ANNOUNCEMENT

February 2015

Australian Securities Exchange Companies Announcements Office ASX Limited Level 40, Central Park 152-158 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000

ASSESSMENT OF CAMECO HISTORICAL EXPLORATION DATA OVER DEVILS ELBOW PROJECT

~~Highlights~~ Highlights

•  Exploration to commence over the Mary Valley Manganese Project around Cameco Australia Pty Ltd conducted exploration over the Devil's Elbow the 22Project from 2001 to 2007.[nd] January 2015.

BOARD

Carl Popal Executive Chairman

•  Geological mapping and ground geochemical surface sampling will A detailed radiometric survey delineated uranium anomalies to the southconcentrate on the Amamoor and Upper Kandanga Historic Manganese west of the Devil’s Elbow Prospect which remain to be tested. Mines.

Pedro Kastellorizos Executive Director

Rodney Dale Non-Executive Director

• Rock Chip results from the Ferricrete Anomaly yielded strong uranium

• Exploration work will also includes the following:assays of 7,620ppm (0.762% U) , 3 , 720ppm (0.372% U) , 3 , 640ppm  (0.364% U) Sampling of possible historic stockpiles at the Amamoor Manganese Mineand 3,620ppm (0.362% U) . Highest total counts are in  excess of 15,550cps. Investigation of the mineralisation along strike to the east and to the west

COMPANY SECRETARY

Eryn Kestel

• of the Upper Kandanga workings

REGISTERED OFFICE

•  Ground investigation over the Devil’s Elbow area found radioactive Investigation of potential sites for an initial drilling programme to test the

• volcanic boulders with counts up to 24,100cps. Samples taken from the radioactive volcanic boulders assayed 1,720ppm (0.172% U ), 1,210ppm U (0.121% U) with a highest value of 3,300ppm U (0.33% U) .

C/-NKH Knight Unit 19 Level 2, Spectrum 100 Railway Road Subiaco WA 6008 Phone: +61 8 9367 8133 Fax: + 61 8 9367 8812

• TEMPEST EM Survey has indicated several long zones of possible intense alteration along the Hogs Back and Ranger fault zones. Thestructural significance of these high priority exploration targets is presently unknown.

PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS

Level 3, 1060 Hay Street West Perth WA 6005 Phone: + 61 8 9480 0420 Fax: + 61 8 9321 0320

The Directors of Eclipse Metals Limited ( “Eclipse Metals” or the “Company’ ) (ASX: EPM) are pleased to announce the results of the first phase review of the historical data generated by Cameco Australia Pty Ltd for ELA 27584 known as the Devil’s Elbow Project. This follows-on from the review of exploration data generated by Uranerz Australia Pty Ltd. (refer report released to ASX on 9 February 2015).

AUSTRALIAN BUSINESS NUMBER

85 142 366 541

SHARE REGISTRY

The project tenements lie approximately 285km east of Darwin within the world class Alligator Rivers Uranium Field. The tenements are situated approximately 41km southeast of the worked-out Nabarlek Uranium Mine which produced 12,000 tonnes of uranium oxide from 568,402t of ore at a grade of 1.95% U3O8.

Security Transfer Registrars 770 Canning Highway Applecross WA 6153

ASX CODE EPM

From 2001 to 2007, Cameco Australia Pty Ltd conducted regional uranium exploration within the central part of ELA 27584, targeting uranium unconformity type deposits.

WEBSITE

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

==> picture [595 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

2

Work carried out included regional airborne TEMPEST EM (electromagnetic) surveys, re-interpretation of historical airborne geophysics surveys, a detail radiometric survey, geological mapping, geochemical surveys and PIMA (Portable Infrared Mineral Analyzer) sampling.

Results of the airborne surveys presented in Figures 1 and 3 highlight a significant uranium channel response from the airborne radiometric survey.

==> picture [370 x 592] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 1: Exploration Summary Map showing airborne radiometric anomalies

==> picture [594 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

3

Devil’s Elbow

Ground investigation of the Devil’s Elbow area during 2002 found radioactive volcanic boulders with up to 24,100cps gamma total count, using a Urtec Minispec UG130 instrument, in the area of Trench 2 on the Goomadeer River. Presumably allochthonous boulders, moved during the trenching performed by Uranerz, exhibited green and yellow secondary uranium minerals, predominantly metatorbernite with subordinate autunite, found as a coating on fractures in quartz and disseminated in patches within the volcanic rock. Sample KL02C10023 and KL02C10235 collected from the radioactive volcanic boulders assayed 1,720ppm (0.172% U) and 1,210ppm (0.121% U) (refer to Figures 1 & 2). The highest geochemical results obtained from the Devil’s Elbow area was 3,300ppm U with 92 ppb Au, from ferruginous rubbly (basaltic?) float in a small creek draining the Ferricrete anomaly.

Two diamond drill holes were completed in 2003 and 2004 in the Devil’s Elbow Prospect for a combined total of 730.7m (KLD101 and KLD104). Drilling of KLD104 in the western Devils Elbow area successfully verified the postulated geological cross-section and the existence of a westerly-tapering wedge of Mamadawerre Sandstone below the Oenpelli Dolerite. Broad intersections of Oenpelli Dolerite are cross-cut by narrow widely-spaced fractures and veins, with associated chlorite, sericite, leucoxene and K-feldspar alteration and elevated gamma radiation (average five times background with spikes up to 30 times background). The best composite geochemical sample analysis returned a value of 112ppm U over 3m, while the best spot geochemical analysis is 638ppm U with 46ppb Au. Uranium-bearing fluids were clearly active in this area, but there appears to have been insufficient deformation and subsequent fluid-rock interaction to facilitate concentration of mineralisation. Two other drill-holes in this programme, KLD100 and KLD101, failed to intersect the Ranger Fault. This suggests a more likely scenario that north to northnorthwest-trending cross-structures to the west of the Ferricrete anomaly, were of greater importance in localising mineralisation in the Nungbalgarri Volcanics.

Ferricrete Anomaly

The Ferricrete Anomaly located within a fault splay of the Ranger Fault zone was sampled in various locations and returned the highest recorded uranium values from all sampling. In 2002, four ferricrete / ironstone samples, KL02C10026, KL02C10225 to 0227, collected from a gorge, returned uranium values of 7,620ppm, 3,720ppm, 3,640ppm and 3,620ppm with associated elevated Au, As, Co, Ni, Pb, V and Zn. Lateritic clays beneath the sandy colluvium exhibit elevated radiometrics, with the highest total counts in excess of 15,500cps gamma (Refer to Figures 1 & 2).

The uranium anomalism is contained in partially ferruginised clays on the valley floor over a lateral extent of approximately 150m, with enriched uranium levels contained in ferricrete / ironstone float material. Uranerz Australia Pty Ltd interpreted the uranium enriched clays as representing the deeply weathered Nungbalgarri Volcanic Member sub-cropping within part of the Ranger Fault system. Samples of rubbly ferricrete formed over parts of the volcanics and now preserved within colluvium, returned assays up to 0.35% U3O8 . Samples from trenching across the valley floor returned assay results of up 0.44% U3O8, with anomalous gold associated with lateritic clays. Due to access difficulties, this area was not drill tested by Uranerz.

Exploration in the area was reduced after it was demonstrated that uranium mineralisation was concentrated in small, narrow NNW trending structures or localised within residual laterite. This structural target is important in localising mineralisation in the Nungbalgarri Volcanic Member. The Ferricrete Anomaly has not been drill tested and remains an exploration target .

Terrace Anomaly

The Terrace anomaly located at the northern end of the Devil’s Elbow area is characterised by elevated radiometrics over an area of rubbly volcanic and ferricrete material on the eastern slope of the main Goomadeer Valley. One sample of float ferricrete / ironstone material returned values of 3.7% U3O8 , 45ppb Th, 0.225% Pb and 36ppb Au. The area is underlain by weathered and lateritised volcanics with low-grade uranium mineralisation of up to 70ppm U3O8 recorded from a one-metre deep trench sample. Significantly, approximately 20 boulders of ferruginous sandstone float were identified as anomalous in uranium, with one

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

==> picture [594 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

4

boulder sample returning a highly anomalous value of 0.21% U3O8 . The boulders are located near a major southeast trending lineament. No sandstone anomalism was discovered in the adjacent outcrop indicating to Uranerz that hydrothermal fluid movements responsible for anomalism in the volcanics also passed through the sandstone in discrete post-sandstone structures that have since been eroded.

One diamond cored drill hole, KLD020, (refer Devils Elbow drill cross-section), was designed to test uranium anomalism in the Terrace Anomaly. This hole intersected 1m of Gumarrimbang Sandstone, considered to be insitu, 8m of lateritic clays and passed into relatively fresh Nungbalgarri Volcanic Member. The lateritic clays contained identified secondary uranium mineralisation ( 3m at 482ppm U3O8 from 2m) and trace supergene copper. No further uranium anomalism was observed within the drill hole.

==> picture [382 x 551] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 2: Cameco Exploration Summary Map showing anomalous geochemical uranium targets

warranting follow-up

==> picture [594 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

5

Rangaman Anomaly

During 2004, the Rangamam Prospect which occurs proximal to the Ranger and Hogs Back Faults, was identified using airborne radiometrics. In 2005, drill-hole KLD0108R (total depth 307.7m) was collared into wet soft sandy sediments along a concealed section of the Ranger Fault, where a small TEMPEST anomaly was identified at the junction of the east-northeast-trending Ranger Fault splay and the northeast trending Hogs Back Fault (Figure 3). These two faults are represented on the TEMPEST EM elevation image as linear positive relief features 0.6 km wide. The initial geological interpretation of the TEMPEST data indicated either a belt of structurally uplifted basement or zone of intensification of alteration along the length of the fault zones. Drilling showed that the latter is not the case and did not provide any evidence for the former model. The zone where conductivity has a positive relief appears to occur within the lower part of the Mamadawerre Sandstone, suggesting it is the result of enhanced permeability. The area remains as a high priority drill target

TEMPEST Targets

One of the primary objectives for the TEMPEST EM survey is to identify conductors associated with structure since these could relate to clays, porosity or graphite indicative of alteration and/or fluid-rock interaction with potential to precipitate uranium. Conductors can be difficult to reliably identify but confidence can be enhanced in the context of known geology.

During 2002, an extensive airborne TEMPEST EM survey was flown over the western part of the project area which has provided some significant insights into the geometry of the sandstone-basement unconformity. Careful comparison with geology has confirmed many of the known faults and allowed several new faults to be inferred. In addition, several conductive unconformity ridges (+/- troughs) appear to be associated with faults, which have not been previously observed in Arnhem Land. The structural significance and source of these features is presently unknown. Northerly and north-westerly trending faults bounding two regions in the northern part of the project area are considered prospective. Furthermore, thirteen targets have been identified which may warrant drill testing but should first be evaluated in the field. There are some indications that the TEMPEST data may be utilised to infer basement geology. In the first instance conductive features may be utilised to identify graphitic lithologies and in the second instance the conductive unconformity response over granite appears more diffuse and broad.

Quartzite Prospect

Results from the Quartzite Prospect match the limited scintillometer anomalies identified in the field, with a maximum of 38ppm U and 8ppb Au. Interestingly, labile Pb isotope ratios are quite low compared with expectations based on uranium content and provide some encouragement in this area. Other anomalous elements include Sn, W, Pd (8.5ppb) and Pt (7.5ppb). A sandstone wedge subsurface geometry is envisaged, as suggested for Devils Elbow. This prospect remains an exploration target for Eclipse Metals Ltd (refer Figure 4 for the location).

==> picture [594 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

6

==> picture [480 x 347] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 3: Aerial TEMPEST Survey Summary Map showing historic drill positions and target zones warranting follow-up

Exploration Potential

Based on the exploration data findings the Company is encouraged with the prospectivity of EL27584. The project area has been shown to contain numerous clusters of first and second order radiometric anomalies in conjunction with major structural target areas which have never been investigated (Figure 4). Prospects delineated by previous exploration remain poorly tested within the tenement area and the surrounding zones around the Ranger Fault. The information has highlighted exploration geochemical/geophysical targets on which testing will be implemented upon granting of tenure.

- Table 1: Major ground exploration targets warranted for follow up

Tenure No	Radiometric Anomalies	1st/2nd Order Classification	Strike Length of Anomaly	Width of Anomaly	Geological Unit
EL27584	1	1st Order	0.46 km	0.25 km	Oenpelli Dolerite
EL27584	2	1st Order	1.21 km	0.47 km	Nungbalgarri VolcanicMember
EL27584	3	1st Order	1.33km	1.17 km	Nungbalgarri VolcanicMember
EL27584	4	1st Order	1.79km	1.73km	Mesozoic Sandstone
EL27584	5	1st Order	0.50km	0.58km	Nungbalgarri VolcanicMember
EL27584	6	2nd Order	4.93 km	0.58 km	Mamadawerre Sandstone

.

==> picture [594 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

7

==> picture [515 x 433] intentionally omitted <==

Figure 4: Historical Drill Collar Positions showing the various Radiometric and Structural Target Zones warranting follow-up

For and on behalf of the board.

==> picture [80 x 68] intentionally omitted <==

Pedro Kastellorizos Executive Director

For further information please contact:

Carl Popal Pedro Kastellorizos Executive Chairman Executive Director T: +61 8 9480 0420 T: +61 8 9480 0420

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results together with any related assessments and interpretations is based on information compiled by Mr Pedro Kastellorizos and Mr Giles Rodney (Rod) Dale, both Directors of Eclipse Metals Limited. Mr Dale is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and has sufficient experience relevant to the styles of mineralisation under consideration and to the activity being reported to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the .Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Kastellorizos is a geologist with over 17 years of experience relevant to the styles of mineralisation under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking as Executive Director.

==> picture [594 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

8

Reference

Otto, G, T, O’Connor, P. T, Zaluski G, & Beckitt, G (2003), Cameco Australia Pty Ltd. Exploration Licence EL 23462 “Kukalak Project” for the period 25 July 2001 to 24 July 2003. Northern Territory Geological Survey Open File Report CR2003/297.

Rawlings, D, Sawyer, L & Beckitt, G (2004), Cameco Australia Pty Ltd. Exploration Licence EL 23462 “Kukalak Project” for the period Annual Report for the Period 25 July 2003 to 24 July 2004. Northern Territory Geological Survey Open File Report CR2004/376.

Rawlings, D & Beckitt, G (2005), Cameco Australia Pty Ltd. Exploration Licence EL 23462 “Kukalak Project” for the period Annual Report for the Period Annual Report for the Period 25 July 2004 to 24 July 2005. Northern Territory Geological Survey Open File Report CR2005/294.

Rawlings, D & Beckitt, G (2006), Cameco Australia Pty Ltd. Exploration Licence EL 23462 “Kukalak Project” for the period Annual Report for the Period Annual Report for the Period 25 July 2005 to 24 July 2006. Northern Territory Geological Survey Open File Report CR2006/289.

Rao, A & Otto, G (2007), Cameco Australia Pty Ltd. Exploration Licence EL 23462 “Kukalak Project” for the period Annual Report for the Period Annual Report for the Period 25 July 2006 to 24 July 2007. Northern Territory Geological Survey Open File Report CR2007/704.

Rao, A & Otto, G (2008), Cameco Australia Pty Ltd. Exploration Licence EL 23462 “Kukalak Project” for the period Annual Report for the Period Annual Report for the Period 25 July 2007 to 24 July 2008. Northern Territory Geological Survey Open File Report CR2008/358.

Rao, A & Otto, G (2009), Cameco Australia Pty Ltd. Exploration Licence EL 23462 “Kukalak Project” for the period Annual Report for the Period Annual Report for the 25 July 2008 to 24 July 2009. Northern Territory Geological Survey Open File Report CR2009/734.

==> picture [594 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

9

Table 1: 2002 – 2003 Highlights from Rock Chip Assay Results from Cameco Reconnaissance

Sample Id	Prospect	Company	Year	AMG 66 Zone 53 East	AMG 66 Zone 53 North	**Uppm **
KL02C10023 KL02C10235 KL02C10025 KL02C10026 KL02C10225 KL02C10226 KL02C10227 KL010231 KL010236 KL010008 KL010017 KL010016	Devil’s Elbow Devil’s Elbow Ferricrete Anomaly Ferricrete Anomaly Ferricrete Anomaly Ferricrete Anomaly Ferricrete Anomaly Terrace Anomaly Terrace Anomaly Reconnaissance Sample Reconnaissance Sample Reconnaissance Sample	Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco Cameco	2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002	342005 341994 328800 342813 342665 342619 342602 341848 341814 341241 340917 340962	8605721 8605414 8618075 8605518 8605453 8605441 8605436 8606158 8606378 8605326 8606515 8606460	1,720 1,210 76.2 7,620 3,720 3,620 3,640 392.53 6.74 0.93 0.58 0.5

==> picture [596 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

10

Table 2: 2003 –2005 Diamond Drill Collar Statistics

Hole	Prospect	Hole	AMG66- 53	AMG66- 53	Elevation	Final Depth	Dip	Azimuth	Start	Completed
**Number **	**Location **	Type	Easting	Northing	(m)	(m)	(degrees)	(degrees)	Date	Date
KLD100 KLD101 KLD104 KLD0108R	Ferricrete Anomaly Devil’s Elbow Devil’s Elbow West Rangaman	DDH DDH DDH DDH	342501 343448 340844 338715	8605564 8605899 8604831 8603829	305 300 273.5 307.7	387.0 376.6 354.1 307.7	-70 -70 -80 -75	160 160 0 170	26/07/2003 4/08/2003 7/08/2004 21/07/2005	30/07/2003 9/08/2003 14/08/2004 24/07/2005

Table 3: Highlights of Drill Assay Results

Drillhole No	Sample No	Rock Type	Depth From	Depth To	Ag (ppm)	Al2O3 (ppm)	As (ppm)	Bi (ppm)	Co (ppm)	Cu (ppm)	Fe2O3 (ppm)	MnO (ppm)	Mo (ppm)	Ni (ppm)	P2O5 (ppm)	Pb (ppm)	Th (ppm)	U (ppm)	Zn (ppm)	Zr	Au_ppb
KLD104 KLD104 KLD104 KLD104 KLD104 KLD104	D04KLD 104-1605 D04KLD 104-1630 D04KLD 104-1669 D04KLD 104-1700 D04KLD 104-2777 D04KLD 104-3040	U mineralised dolerite U mineralised dolerite U mineralised dolerite U mineralised dolerite U mineralised dolerite U mineralised dolerite	160.4 162.9 166.8 169.9 277.7 304	160.6 163.1 167.1 170.1 278 304.2	-0.05 0.05 1.25 0.55 0.15 -0.05	134000 140000 142000 153000 151000 162000	9.0 71.0 184.0 4760.0 53.0 58.0	0.44 0.72 2.54 11.80 5.82 0.46	33 86 144 2530 46 67	175 37 120 17 90 53	102700 116000 98400 124000 77700 84600	622 530 578 656 614 716	1.75 5.45 44.50 11.00 13.00 3.15	52 65 87 1020 157 113	3000 3300 3800 3000 1450 1750	18 31 214 243 11 23	5.3 5.1 13.3 13.3 2.7 1.9	150 104 638 93 31 90	90 70 142 106 26 26	228.0 215.0 250.0 170.0 77.4 90.4	3 10 46 44 43 1

==> picture [596 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

11

– JORC Code, 2012 Edition Table 1 report

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Sampling techniques	 Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.  Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.  Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.  In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.	 In 2002, rock chip samples were collected as part of the field reconnaissance program. Samples were collected based on the total count reading over each of the radiometric anomalies that were identified from the aerial radiometric survey – if high reading were present in the field.  Each rock chip sample was approximately 1kg or 2kg in weight within the exploration licence area.  From 2003 to 2005, Diamond drilling was used to collect samples for geological logging and assaying with only high cps intervals used for analysis.  Some sections of diamond core were split at 1 metre intervals if warranted. Some drill samples were submitted for XRF analysis for Ag, Al2O3, As, Bi, Co, Cu, Fe2O3, Mno, Mo, Ni, P2O5, Pb, Th, and Zn. Assays results are given in ppm with uranium Core and outcrop samples are routinely submitted to Northern Territory Environmental Laboratories Pty Ltd (NTEL) in Darwin for sample preparation and multi-element analysis (G400 and G950 analyses). A split of each pulp was submitted to North Australian Laboratories Pty Ltd in Pine Creek for Au analysis using Fire Assay with an ICPMS or ICPOES finish (either method is suitable).
Drilling techniques	 Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other _type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). _	 Diamond drilling was completed totalling 1,425.4 metres. No core was orientated with no down hole surveys taken during drilling.
Drill sample	 Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries	 Nopercussion drilled metres were weighted with no sample

==> picture [596 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

	ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED	ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED	12
	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
recovery		and results assessed.  Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.  Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material.	recovery numbers given within the reports
Logging		 Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.  Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.  The total length andpercentage of the relevant intersections logged.	 All Diamond drill-hole metres were geologically logged.  Detailed geological logs provided
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation		 If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.  If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.  For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.  Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples.  Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.  Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled.	 Some of the diamond core split using a core saw.  Certain intervals of diamond core was submitted to the lab depending if gamma radiation was encountered.
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests		 The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.  For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.  Nature of quality controlprocedures adopted(eg standards, blanks,	 Rock Chip and Drill samples were sent to NTEL in Darwin and Pine Creek, Northern Territory, for multi-element analysis for XRF analysis to determine content of U (ppm), Th (ppm), K (ppm), Cu (ppm), Pb (ppm), Zn (ppm), Ni (ppm), Co (ppm) and Au (ppm). The trench samples also include Pt (ppm) and Pd (ppm). The G400 Analytical Procedures & G950 Analytical Procedures were used.

==> picture [596 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

	ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED	ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED	13
	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) andprecision have been established.
Verification of sampling and assaying		 The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.  The use of twinned holes.  Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.  Discuss any adjustment to assay data.	 All data was validated through geological cross-sections and further validated when imported into Micromine geological software. The surface sample and drill positions were geo-referenced with MapInfo GIS Software Version 10.
Location of data points		 Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.  Specification of the grid system used.  Quality and adequacy of topographic control.	 All coordinate information was collected using a hand held GPS based on AMG 66 Zone 52.  Coordinates of the samples are presented in Tables 1 and 2 of the announcement and within the maps.
Data spacing and distribution		 Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.  Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.  Whether sample compositing has been applied.	 The location of surface samples and drillhole positions are shown on the various maps with the coordinates presented in the Tables 1 and 2.
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure		 Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.  If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.	 Holes were drilled perpendicular to the strike of the mineralisation and the various faults. Some holes were drilled sub-vertical to vertical in order to obtain geological and structural information.
Sample security		 The measures taken to ensure sample security.	 Samples were labelled/bagged and taken to the analytical laboratory in Darwin.
Audits or reviews		 The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.	 Not applicable as not audits were conducted

==> picture [596 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED

14

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section)

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
Mineral tenement and land tenure status	 Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.  The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.	 ELA27854 is held beneficially for Eclipse Metals Limited. The total area of the ELA is 100.45 sq km
Exploration done by other parties	 Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.	 From 2002 to 2007, Cameco Australia Pty Ltd conducted included regional TEMPEST airborne electromagnetic surveys, re- interpretation of historical airborne geophysical surveys, detail radiometric surveys, geological mapping, geochemical surveys and PIMA sampling. Results of the airborne surveys are presented in Figures 1,2 and 3.
Geology	 Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.	 Unconformity style uranium mineralisation based on the West Arnhem (Alligator Uranium Fields) geological model.
Drill hole Information	 A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length.  If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case.	 Refer to Table 2
Data aggregation methods	 In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.	 Refer to Table 3

==> picture [596 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au

	ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED	ECLIPSE METALS LIMITED	15
	Criteria	JORC Code explanation	Commentary
		 Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.  The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated.
Relationship between mineralisatio n widths and intercept lengths		 These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.  If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.  If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true _width not known’). _	 No significant mineralisation was encountered from the historical drilling
Diagrams		 Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.	 See Map within the report
Balanced reporting		 Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results.	 Refer to Table and Figures 1, 2 and 3
Other substantive exploration data		 Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.	 Not applicable
Further work		 The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).  Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.	 Commencement of exploration work is scheduled once the Northern Territory Mines Department grants tenure to Eclipse Metal Ltd.

==> picture [596 x 29] intentionally omitted <==

www.eclipsemetals.com.au